Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757265AbYGPBnd (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:43:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753989AbYGPBnW (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:43:22 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:32999 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753470AbYGPBnV (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:43:21 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:36:19 -0400 From: Dave Jones To: Theodore Tso , Linus Torvalds , david@lang.hm, Marcel Holtmann , David Woodhouse , Frans Pop , jeff@garzik.org, arjan@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT *] Allow request_firmware() to be satisfied from in-kernel, use it in more drivers. Message-ID: <20080716013619.GD17417@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Theodore Tso , Linus Torvalds , david@lang.hm, Marcel Holtmann , David Woodhouse , Frans Pop , jeff@garzik.org, arjan@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1216150616.27455.377.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1216151640.27242.90.camel@violet.holtmann.net> <20080716005133.GK8185@mit.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080716005133.GK8185@mit.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1356 Lines: 30 On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 08:51:33PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > For one reason, because there's more than one mkinitrd. FC9 ships > with mkinitrd 6.0.52; OpenSuSE ships with mkinitrd 2.1, and the > sources don't look even vaguely similar to one another. Right. Other than name, they've historically shared nothing. Both have grown through the evolution of multiple distros, requiring different workarounds in each due to differences in CONFIG_ options in the kernel between vendors for eg. Whilst it would be great for unified development on the tools that create the early boot process, I think it's a non-starter due to the fact that you can't really do it without throwing out everything you already have today. The same reason imo, that hpa's klibc work hasn't gained mass-appeal from vendors. Even if we had a 'reference' mkinitrd in the kernel, it would be pretty much useless until it reached feature parity with every distros existing tools, and if everyone uses those instead of furthering the reference implementation, it fails on the starting blocks. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/